33 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Conveniently ignored is that the initial actions of  ICE may have been illegal.

 

1. ICE showed up in the courtroom and sought to interject in the middle of a proceeding.The protocol is that  any action must  first be authorized by  the chief judge of the courthouse. Police cannot burst into a court room and demand to arrest a person. 

 

2. The judge stated that the warrant ICE had was not appropriate and that it needed a different type of warrant to arrest the accused. 

Either the  correct legal procedures are followed or they are not. If not, the rule of law disintegrates.

 

Allowing government  agents to arrest anyone without  respecting legal procedures or the law itself sets a precedent. Next time   they won't be arresting alleged  immigration offenders.

 

 

You have conveniently only gotten the incident partially correct. The judge asked the agents if they had a judicial warrant for his arrest, which is necessary to make an arrest inside the Courthouse; they told her that they only had an administrative warrant and intended to make the arrest outside the court.

She then, after adjourning the hearing, directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave the court by a door leading to a non-public area in a deliberate and wilful attempt to prevent the agents from arresting Flores-Ruiz.

 

She has rightfully been charged with two criminal counts of "obstructing and impeding a proceeding before a department or agency of the United States" and "concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest"

 

Unless you are a left-wing extremist, I can see no reason for you wanting to defend a judge that has deliberately obstructed the arrest of an illegal immigrant; one that was issued an Expedited removal order in 2013, and is wanted for alleged domestic abuse.

 

 

 

 

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The ‘warrant’ they had was an ‘administrative warrant’, it was not signed by a judge.

This has....................

 

10 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

You have conveniently only gotten the incident partially correct. The judge asked the agents if they had a judicial warrant for his arrest, which is necessary to make an arrest inside the Courthouse; they told her that they only had an administrative warrant and intended to make the arrest outside the court.

She then, after adjourning the hearing, directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave the court by a door leading to a non-public area in a deliberate and wilful attempt to prevent the agents from arresting Flores-Ruiz.

 

She has rightfully been charged with two criminal counts of "obstructing and impeding a proceeding before a department or agency of the United States" and "concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest"

 

Unless you are a left-wing extremist, I can see no reason for you wanting to defend a judge that has deliberately obstructed the arrest of an illegal immigrant; one that was issued an Expedited removal order in 2013, and is wanted for alleged domestic abuse.

 

 

 

 

You are confusing allegations in the affidavit as fact.

The affidavit came after the arrest, it is the arresting officers account of the incident. Put simply, one side of the story.

I don’t think not automatically regarding allegations as fact has ever been the reserve of ‘left-wing extremists’, in fact I’m quite certain that there exists a whole process of law and jurisdiction to examine allegations as factual or otherwise.

 

 

 

21 hours ago, bamnutsak said:

 

Kash Patel said "No one is above the law."

 

I was replying to his silly claim.

 

trump is above the law.

 

 

You don’t know what you are talking about.

44 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

 

You have conveniently only gotten the incident partially correct. The judge asked the agents if they had a judicial warrant for his arrest, which is necessary to make an arrest inside the Courthouse; they told her that they only had an administrative warrant and intended to make the arrest outside the court.

She then, after adjourning the hearing, directed Flores-Ruiz and his attorney to leave the court by a door leading to a non-public area in a deliberate and wilful attempt to prevent the agents from arresting Flores-Ruiz.

 

She has rightfully been charged with two criminal counts of "obstructing and impeding a proceeding before a department or agency of the United States" and "concealing an individual to prevent his discovery and arrest"

 

Unless you are a left-wing extremist, I can see no reason for you wanting to defend a judge that has deliberately obstructed the arrest of an illegal immigrant; one that was issued an Expedited removal order in 2013, and is wanted for alleged domestic abuse.

 

 

 

 

 

Is your version based upon the events recorded in the courtroom?  The judge was arrested based upon  an affidavit that  presented this "evidence"

 

3. I base this affidavit upon personal knowledge and upon information reported to me by other federal law enforcement officers during and as part of their official duties, all of whom I believe to be truthful and reliable. In this affidavit, “case agents” refers to me and other FBI Special Agents who directly have participated with me in this investigation. I also base this affidavit upon information provided by citizen witnesses and other information as described below.

 

5. This affidavit is intended to show merely that there is probable cause for the requested criminal complaint and does not set forth my complete knowledge regarding this matter.

 

So far we have the enforcement agents' version. Unfortunately,   other cases  have shown that the    agents  lie.  This is not about whether or not someone should be detained and  removed from the country. it is about the sanctity of the  judicial process and the importance of keeping  law enforcement separate from judicial practice.

Good to see that the left are still at the defense of terrorists and criminals. Keep on shooting yourselves in the foot guys

20 hours ago, Tug said:

So does trump for the espionage act for starters obstructing Justice rape and imbezzling and many counts of fraud attempted coup attempted murder of the vice president and on and on.

Do yo have a link to that..???????????????

10 minutes ago, hotsun said:

Good to see that the left are still at the defense of terrorists and criminals. Keep on shooting yourselves in the foot guys

 

It is a defense of the separation of powers and of the  need to keep the judicial system  independent. The same rights protect you from unauthorized stop and search and detention.

1 minute ago, Patong2021 said:

 

It is a defense of the separation of powers and of the  need to keep the judicial system  independent. The same rights protect you from unauthorized stop and search and detention.

Dont do anything wrong. If you come here to study at a US university dont spend your time protesting. They <deleted> around and found out

25 minutes ago, hotsun said:

Dont do anything wrong. If you come here to study at a US university dont spend your time protesting. They <deleted> around and found out

This is nothing to do with students at US Universities.

 

Please check the topic before cutting and pasting talking points from your hymn sheet.

1 hour ago, thesetat said:

The police had a legal arrest warrant which Judges sign prior to the criminals captur

Did they? Was it executed according to the law?

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

This is nothing to do with students at US Universities.

 

Please check the topic before cutting and pasting talking points from your hymn sheet.

Im not a lawyer like you, i dont defend bad people for their wrong choices. Justice is something out of your realm

6 minutes ago, hotsun said:

Im not a lawyer like you, i dont defend bad people for their wrong choices. Justice is something out of your realm

I don’t defend bad people, nor am I a lawyer.

 

Your resort to limp ad hominem is once again noted.

 

 

On 4/26/2025 at 10:38 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

She ALLEGEDLY intentionally committed a criminal act and ALLEGEDLY willfully violated USC section 1324.

You don't seem to understand that the presumption of innocence only applies if you are on the jury or a judge presiding over the case instead of a  jury. She was arrested for letting an illegal alien evade custody going through her chamber. I don't need to add allegedly.

 

Nothing screams I don't know anything about USA law like the repeated misuse/abuse of the term allegedly.

 

 

3 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

You don't seem to understand that the presumption of innocence only applies if you are on the jury or a judge presiding over the case instead of a  jury. She was arrested for letting an illegal alien evade custody going through her chamber. I don't need to add allegedly.

 

Nothing screams I don't know anything about USA law like the repeated misuse/abuse of the term allegedly.

 

 

I understand the affidavit contains allegations.

The affidavit is the only ‘evidence’ presented.

 

Nobody is above the law...

 

Rachel Maddow 2023 2024 2025....she how she flip flops

 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ALPKUGyCG/

Trolling meme removed